Yikes. What a weird thing to try to make it about race. So to clarify, if you're not white and male, then obviously you're just not serious about a job because you're a "diversity" hire and not a serious person. Got it.
There can be diverse good candidates of course, there's no racism here.
You should not know and should not take it in consideration but in the USA this is part of the application. I understand the whole point is to make sure diverse candidate are not discriminated against (and of course that would be a ridiculous thing to do), but it seems to have been perverted into caricaturical discrimination _for_, even favoring a diverse incompetent candidate over a non-diverse competent one.
Then how do you suppose we ended up with fields where nearly everyone was a white male, if race was never taken into consideration?
That's a crazy claim told without any proof. I don't see any studies, sources linked in your comment. That just sounds like your own anecdotal perspective.
The point is, people in this position should be hired based on merit regardless of their race, sex, or anything else.
I am not saying that and yes that would be obvious. That doesn't negate anything about how it's on the "diversity hires" and not the veterans pointed out in this thread, lol
It's all just speculation.
> The point is, people in this position should be hired based on merit regardless of their race, sex, or anything else.
What's your proof that people aren't hired based on merit regardless of their race, sex, or anything else though? Just wild speculation on your part? lol